Hatred is Out

[Noir Angel]

The popularity of this game doesn't really have a whole lot to do with GamerGate, it's more another demonstration of the Streisand effect in action. SJW's and the idiots in the press tried so hard to censor the game that all they did was generate more intrigue. The funny thing is I can't even see anything that noteworthy about the game.

If this is an example of anything it's of how idiotic SJW moral panics are.

[+Nik Louch Subscriber²]

Yeah, this is one for the wannabe angsty teens.  The voice over is so cliche of those sad losers!

[Luc2k]

By ignoring it.

Kind of hard to do that when almost the entirety of games media spouts the same crap over and over again. A lot of people can't stay away from these articles unfortunately so they do the opposite of what the media wants, in this case, buy Hatred.

[astropheed Veteran]

Kind of hard to do that when almost the entirety of games media spouts the same crap over and over again. A lot of people can't stay away from these articles unfortunately so they do the opposite of what the media wants, in this case, buy Hatred.

 

I was referring to "games media", not you. If they want to truly show disapproval then they should ignore it. Although I have a feeling they aren't actually trying to show disapproval and are more likely playing everyone for a bunch of saps. I of course could be wrong but their reverse psychology game is outstanding if by accident and well played if on purpose.

[DrunknMunky Veteran]

The creators of this game are smart: they cashed in on all of this tension and did it without creating anything particularly interesting or ground-breaking. It seems like it is just passable for a twin-stick shooter. They used outrage marketing to pretty good effect. I'd be interested to see what sort of sales they achieve.

 

And while people criticize it, they forget GTA did the exact same thing in 1997. Now look at R* and what fans think...

[vcfan]

and this is what the cuck journalists at kotaku are up to

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkIPjc82B-I

 

can't you tell how objective and unbiased they are. Like a bunch of babies being forced to eat their vegetables.  

 

embarrassing

[Luc2k]

I was referring to "games media", not you. If they want to truly show disapproval then they should ignore it. Although I have a feeling they aren't actually trying to show disapproval and are more likely playing everyone for a bunch of saps. I of course could be wrong but their reverse psychology game is outstanding if by accident and well played if on purpose.

I guess it got confusing as original question was about a way gamers should show disapproval of the games media.

 

As for your second point, my feelings exactly. There have to be at least a couple that do it on purpose..

[NightScreams]

Looks repetitive. I don't even think Postal got near this attention back in it's day but going all Columbine on the world in a video game doesn't seem very newsworthy or ban worthy to me. It's not like kids can't view just as much from watching movies or get the idea of terrible murders from reading books or the news so I don't really get the whole ban a video game thing.

[The Evil Overlord]

I never heard of AO games on consoles.

If, by AO, you mean Adults Only, there are lots of titles that are rated adults only available for consoles, have been since the first playstation and the first x box

 

(Thrill Kill, GTA, Resident Evil, etc...)

[+Red King Subscriber²]

If, by AO, you mean Adults Only, there are lots of titles that are rated adults only available for consoles, have been since the first playstation and the first x box

 

(Thrill Kill, GTA, Resident Evil, etc...)

Ah so nothing showing sexy time - I should rant about that one day.

Also GTA was re-rated because hot coffee.

[The Evil Overlord]

Ah so nothing showing sexy time - I should rant about that one day.

Also GTA was re-rated because hot coffee.

Well, on that note, The Getaway, BMX XXX and God of War had nudity in it, GOW even implied an interactive sex act by use of the control pad. and the original GTA was 18 in the UK (which makes it an adult rated title long before the hot coffee mod)

 

(Sorry about the off topic posts everyone, and I do hope it does see console release, from what I've played, it would suit me better to play it with a control pad<personal preference>, as my computer's main function was a workstation, and not a gaming rig)

 

 

(edit, just for the record, I wasn't trying to start an argument, no hostility meant toward you)

[compl3x]

And while people criticize it, they forget GTA did the exact same thing in 1997. Now look at R* and what fans think...

 

Fair. But R* didn't act all smug and claim they were making some sort of statement against political correctness or "polite" games". Additionally, I think GTA might have been more revolutionary & fresh in its day. I think it started out where you could play the cops or robbers, but playing the cops was so boring they made you just a criminal who could do whatever he wanted.

 

 

These days, when a lot of games are heading to be polite, colorful, politically correct and trying to be some kind of higher art, rather than just an entertainment

[Athernar]

Maybe I just haven't been paying attention but I've seen no real concerted effort to have this banned. By 'SJWs' or by anyone else. The fact it is not available in Australia and Germany was a developer choice, not censorship (this should be pointed out because so many people went "oh my god, censorship!"). The only criticism has been how transparent the attempt has been to gain popularity from outrage while claiming to be bucking some trend which doesn't even seem to exist.

 

Good luck to them, but what they are doing is obvious.

 

I think you're forgetting that the SJW outrage machine as stirred up by Polygon et al managed to get Hatred pulled off Greenlight until Gabe Newell stepped in and reinstated the game himself.

 

It's all very well to point at the developers and accuse them of using said outrage to their advantage, but that outrage simply never would've existed if it wasn't for the pro-SJW games media outlets (again, like Polygon) heaping so much attention on the game from the start.

[compl3x]

Do we even know why it was pulled from Steam? I never remember reading it was due to Polygon or SJW influence. I know Polygon & the SJWs are much hated among GG advocates but I think you guys give them way, way too much credit when it comes to the influence they have on anyone or anything. Steam might have genuinely thought this title would be more controversial trouble than it was worth. In the end it was re-instated and I guarantee you that the developers couldn't believe their luck that it was pulled in the first place. Not only was it free advertising but it plays into the idea of them being robbed of their "right to free speech".

 

I'm not really 'accusing' them of anything. The developers have been pretty open about how happy they are to receive all of this free publicity. If you make games this graphic and contradict social mores so overtly you better expect a fair wack of criticism and some of it to be pretty passionate.

 

 

Having said all of this, the game is available to anyone who wants it except those who the developers decided to not supply it to. I have a feeling it was never really in any danger of not being published.

[Athernar]

Do we even know why it was pulled from Steam? I never remember reading it was due to Polygon or SJW influence. I know Polygon & the SJWs are much hated among GG advocates but I think you guys give them way, way too much credit when it comes to the influence they have on anyone or anything. Steam might have genuinely thought this title would be more controversial trouble than it was worth. In the end it was re-instated and I guarantee you that the developers couldn't believe their luck that it was pulled in the first place. Not only was it free advertising but it plays into the idea of them being robbed of their "right to free speech".

 

I'm not really 'accusing' them of anything. The developers have been pretty open about how happy they are to receive all of this free publicity. If you make games this graphic and contradict social mores so overtly you better expect a fair wack of criticism and some of it to be pretty passionate.

 

 

Having said all of this, the game is available to anyone who wants it except those who the developers decided to not supply it to. I have a feeling it was never really in any danger of not being published.

 

That doesn't make any sense. Valve would've had to be uncharacteristically prescient (and caring) to pluck out this one game from the truckload of detritus that lands on Greenlight on a daily basis.

 

We all know how hands-off Valve are about Greenlight and that they're pretty much always reactive to controversy. It's pretty clear that the game was pulled because of SJW outrage orchestrated by games media outlets that pander to that crowd. Remember, Valve's stated goals with Steam is to step as far away as possible from the role of curator and place that job in the hands of the user/community. Pulling Hatred was contrary to policy.

[compl3x]

They were no doubt made aware of it of it via the controversy it was causing and some within Valve may have decided it could generate more negative publicity than it was worth. That is an entirely plausible explanation. What seems less likely, almost on the borderline of paranoia, is that some media outlets and some people we'll nebulously call "social justice warriors" deliberately orchestrated to have the game pulled. Did anyone start a petition to have the game pulled? Did anyone of any real influence suggest the game should be pulled? They might have, but I don't recall any serious attempt to censor the game.

 

All of this is moot anyway because the game was reinstated and is now available. If Polygon and the SJWs did really try to censor this, they failed. Not only did they fail very publicly and set a precedent for protecting the future of ultra-violent games on Steam, they no doubt triggered the Streisand effect and helped this game get more attention and potentially more sales. Destructive Creations must love Polygon and the SJWs for all their effort.

[Athernar]

They were no doubt made aware of it of it via the controversy it was causing and some within Valve may have decided it could generate more negative publicity than it was worth. That is an entirely plausible explanation. What seems less likely, almost on the borderline of paranoia, is that some media outlets and some people we'll nebulously call "social justice warriors" deliberately orchestrated to have the game pulled. Did anyone start a petition to have the game pulled? Did anyone of any real influence suggest the game should be pulled? They might have, but I don't recall any serious attempt to censor the game.

 

All of this is moot anyway because the game was reinstated and is now available. If Polygon and the SJWs did really try to censor this, they failed. Not only did they fail, they no doubt triggered the Streisand effect and helped this game get more attention and potentially more sales. Destructive Creations must love Polygon and the SJWs for all their effort.

 

That's the point I'm making, the game was only controversial / causing controversy from the start because of the coverage provided to it by Polygon et al. Nobody would've known about it otherwise.

 

It's pretty simple. Media outlets publish moral panic clickbait targeting Hatred, whipping up outrage on social media amongst the SJW crowd, outrage equals clicks equals money. So games media get their money and secure an audience demographic that are highly predictable and easily manipulated. SJWs get to have their little soapbox and feel accomplished they've done something for a change. The only risk is that media has to keep their new audience occupied with regular controversies lest the outrage machine turn back on them. (As you can see today with Kotaku ringing the death knell of indies over Valve's 2 hour refund policy)

 

Usually the developers on the receiving end don't get anything but death threats and their business plans sabotaged, but in this case Valve stopped that from happening.

[compl3x]

And the outrage is beneficial for both sides. This trick is one of the oldest in the book.

 

The side that posts about moral panic draws attention to itself and the ones causing the panic enjoy the kind of marketing and advertising you just can't buy. (Well some companies have bought this type of marketing in the past, but that is another story.)

 

Is everyone who is critical of a game that revels on the wanton slaughter of people an SJW? Is there no room for a valid criticism of the content without the obnoxious cry of "SJW!"? I've seen some people get a little hysterical, but a lot of the negative comments I've seen about the game seem to be pretty measured. 

 

 

Usually the developers on the receiving end don't get anything but death threats and their business plans sabotaged, but in this case Valve stopped that from happening.

 

 

How did Valve stop this developer receiving death threats, again? If someone wanted to threaten them Valve could have in no way stopped them. Assuming that there was ever any real likelihood of this developer receiving any death threats at all.

[Athernar]

And the outrage is beneficial for both sides. This trick is one of the oldest in the book.

 

The side that posts about moral panic draws attention to itself and the ones causing the panic enjoy the kind of marketing and advertising you just can't buy. (Well some companies have bought this type of marketing in the past, but that is another story.)

 

Is everyone who is critical of a game that revels on the wanton slaughter of people an SJW? Is there no room for a valid criticism of the content without the obnoxious cry of "SJW!"? I've seen some people get a little hysterical, but a lot of the negative comments I've seen about the game seem to be pretty measured. 

 

Wrong, the Hatred developers got lucky with the intercession of Gabe Newell. Otherwise they would've been screwed, as is usually the case for whomever is the victim of the SJW outrage machine.

 

How did Valve stop this developer receiving death threats, again? If someone wanted to threaten them Valve could have in no way stopped them. Assuming that there was ever any real likelihood of this developer receiving any death threats at all.

 

I think it should be pretty obvious I was saying they stopped the Hatred developer's business plans from being sabotaged by reinstating the game on Greenlight. Come on now dude.

[+Asmodai MVC]

Is everyone who is critical of a game that revels on the wanton slaughter of people an SJW? Is there no room for a valid criticism of the content without the obnoxious cry of "SJW!"? I've seen some people get a little hysterical, but a lot of the negative comments I've seen about the game seem to be pretty measured.

If people where just critical of the game it wouldn't have gotten the press it did. There are a lot of bad games with bad reviews that don't get anywhere near this press.

It's because there was an attempt to BAN it from Steam that was only avoided when Gabe stepped in personally to undo it.

To answer your question though if you are critical of a game that revels on the wanton slaughter of people then no you're not a SJW. Being critical of something isn't enough.

If however you attempt to prevent others from buying something you are critical of (such as trying to get it removed from Steam) then you ARE a SJW.

If you don't like it, don't buy it. If you feel strongly about how bad it is then by all means tell others how bad you think it is. Neither of those make you a SJW. A SJW is someone who tries to impose their views on others, not just someone who has an opinion.

[compl3x]

Wrong, the Hatred developers got lucky with the intercession of Gabe Newell. Otherwise they would've been screwed, as is usually the case for whomever is the victim of the SJW outrage machine.

 

Not being available on Steam would no doubt have been a blow, but I've seen nothing to suggest there was any real attempt to pressure Steam to remove this title. Was there a threat of a boycott? Did anyone petition Steam to refuse the sale of the game? As far as I know there were no such attempts.

 

Steam seems to be the only one responsible for Steam's decision and its reversal.

 

 

I think it should be pretty obvious I was saying they stopped the Hatred developer's business plans from being sabotaged by reinstating the game on Greenlight. Come on now dude.

 

I read what people write; I don't assume what they do or don't mean. You posted it, you're responsible for it. Proofreading takes a second and helps to ensure what you are trying to convey is clear.

 

 

If people where just critical of the game it wouldn't have gotten the press it did. There are a lot of bad games with bad reviews that don't get anywhere near this press.

 

 

There are few games which approach this level of graphic, hostile depictions of violence. It got the press because of the cynical attitude of the developers trying to cash in on adolescent angst and perhaps the inevitable clash between GamerGate and anti-GamerGate folk. It seems to have worked rather well for them.

 

 

It's because there was an attempt to BAN it from Steam that was only avoided when Gabe stepped in personally to undo it.

 

Yes, Steam very temporarily banned it. Steam, for whatever reason, decided to pull and then reinstate this game. I see no evidence they were pressured. I don't even see evidence there was any kind of concerted effort to ban it. If you were really cynical you might argue this whole stunt was deliberate, but I doubt Steam would go out of its way for such a small title.

 

 

To answer your question though if you are critical of a game that revels on the wanton slaughter of people then no you're not a SJW. Being critical of something isn't enough.

 

Besides a few hysterical posts, I have only seen people be critical of the content of the game.  Asking what the motivations for showing graphic executions of average citizens is valid. Asking what PC the devs claimed they were opposing is valid. 

 

 

If however you attempt to prevent others from buying something you are critical of (such as trying to get it removed from Steam) then you ARE a SJW.

If you don't like it, don't buy it. If you feel strongly about how bad it is then by all means tell others how bad you think it is. Neither of those make you a SJW. A SJW is someone who tries to impose their views on others, not just someone who has an opinion.

 

As I asked early in this topic: was there any real attempt to boycott or petition Steam not to sell this game? As far as I can tell the answer is no. Valve made a decision people didn't like and have somehow concluded it was all at the behest of a few SJWs & media outlets despised by GamerGate folk. The more likely explanation is that Steam thought the game was excessively controversial and that it might cause bad publicity. Whether that decision was wise or unwise is up for debate, but I see no reason to conclude this wasn't a decision made solely to protect the Valve and Steam brand.

[Athernar]

Not being available on Steam would no doubt have been a blow, but I've seen nothing to suggest there was any real attempt to pressure Steam to remove this title. Was there a threat of a boycott? Did anyone petition Steam to refuse the sale of the game? As far as I know there were no such attempts.

 

Yes, they did. There are a lot of people out there on the Internet and you did say "anyone".

 

Are you going to now try and claim that not a single person on the entire internet did so?

  

I read what people write; I don't assume what they do or don't mean. You posted it, you're responsible for it. Proofreading takes a second and helps to ensure what you are trying to convey is clear.

 

Nah dude, it's your responsibility to not draw patently absurd conclusions and use a little common sense. I'm not here to spoonfeed you.

[protocol7]

Considering the dreck that's hit Steam lately this looks pretty competent. Although from watching Jim Sterling's playthrough it is pretty much a one-trick pony. I'll probably give it a play when it hits the inevitable indie bundle as it doesn't look like something I'd spend much money on.

[compl3x]

Yes, they did. There are a lot of people out there on the Internet and you did say "anyone".

 

Are you going to now try and claim that not a single person on the entire internet did so?

  

 

Nah dude, it's your responsibility to not draw patently absurd conclusions and use a little common sense. I'm not here to spoonfeed you.

 

 

Are you sure you can't spoon-feed me some evidence of your social justice warrior conspiracy? I mean, after all, that would be all that is necessary to prove your point. It's rather peculiar that it's been so conspicuously absent from this exchange.

 

 

Use your common sense and accept that this was more likely a dopey idea from Steams PR department, not because Polygon contributors bitched about it.

[Noir Angel]

Here is just one of the stupid pieces Polygon wrote about the game:

 

https://archive.is/M861l#selection-1557.105-1561.60

 

Among other things, they accused the game's creators of

 

 

They describe the groups which members of the Hatred team "like" on Facebook as racist, neo-fascist and violent.

 

 

Polygon itself was among the first to criticize Hatred. Soon after, those critical of the game